The poverty of the nationalist mindset. Illustrated by the Irish mindset.

MacAvoydgeen

Earlier this year I overheard this announcement on RTE radio: "Coming up after the break we'll tell you how the Irish horses got on at Cheltenham." Most of the audience doesn't take an interest in horseracing, but they will if there's an Irish angle. The reason why Irish audiences will listen to a story about Irish horses is that the horses are Irish. This problem -- I'll be arguing it's a problem -- goes far beyond sport stories. In the business section of the newspaper, an article about a software company will attract more interest from Irish readers if the company is somehow associated with Ireland. Repeating myself, a reader who'd normally take little or no interest in the software business will read a business story about software if it's presented with an Irish angle -- and I've noticed the business section of the Irish Times doing that many times.

As one more concrete example of the problem, a man of Irish nationality used to be the CEO of all or part of the Unilever multinational conglomerate. Doing the following Google search returns 45 stories at IrishTimes.com mentioning Unilever and this man's name:

Unilever "Niall Fitzgerald" site:irishtimes.com

He retired from Unilever in 2004. The successor retired in 2008. Searching for either of the successors returns only 7 stories:

Unilever "Patrick Cescau" OR "Paul Polman" -"Niall Fitzgerald" site:irishtimes.com

The state of mind of most Irish people is that they need an Irish angle before they'll take an interest in Unilever's businesses. They've really got no grounds for being interested otherwise. Their knowledge in this area will always be superficial because they just aren't interested enough. Needless to say they're ultimately entitled to have whatever interests they happen to have. But the problem is that, outside of Irish politics, the Irish angle is irrelevant to nearly all aspects of real life. It is irrelevant to how racehorses are trained; irrelevant to how to run a software business; and so on. There's no such thing as an Irish horse: If you find a difference between a bunch of horses in Ireland and a bunch in France, the difference can and should be described without reference to Ireland or France. A horse is a horse.

To finish off my definition of the problem, here are a couple of examples of the worthless trivial fluff that the editors of the Irish Times business section believe their readers will eat up:

Fri 03 Mar 2005 HEADLINE: FitzGerald awarded £1.22m compensation. "Niall FitzGerald, who retired as co-chairman of Unilever in September last year, has been awarded £1.22 million (€1.76 million) as "compensation upon the termination of his employment" as part of total emoluments in 2004 of £3.74 million, according to the consumer products group's annual report. Mr FitzGerald's pension will also be boosted. Although he retired at 59, he will be treated as if he had remained in employment with the group until his 60th birthday, in September this year...."

Fri 11 Nov 1996 HEADLINE: Ireland's top City player makes strong case for EMU. "When the Confederation of British Industry decided to hold a major debate on European Monetary Union this week, they choose an Irishman to make the case for Europe. Peter Sutherland was, of course, well qualified for the brief. Ironically another Irishman, Niall FitzGerald of Unilever, also pleaded Europe's case and sharply criticised the British government's attitude to Europe...."

An explanation of what Central-Bank-produced money is, and how a monetary system functions, is pretty complex. You couldn't learn it from reading the newspapers. The great majority of the Irish Times business-section readers have not and will not take the time and effort needed to understand it. But they are entertained by the above sort of froth. This is a reflection of a kind of nationalism or national identity, of locally-grounded values and locally-grounded thinking. Locally-grounded prior knowledge and interests forms the basis for the acquisition of more locally-grounded knowledge.

And it inhibits the acquisition of non-locally-grounded knowledge.

And the problem is that locally-grounded bodies of knowledge are relatively impoverished compared to non-locally-grounded bodies of knowledge. (Exceptions for electoral politics, real estate development, and maybe one or two other areas I can't think of). That's because -- for example -- a horse is a horse. As another example, if you want to know how the fiat money system works in the UK, it's true you need to know something about the UK's particular conditions, but the UK-specific details are not your foundation. Fiat money works essentially the same way in the UK, EU, US, and Japanese currencies. As another example, a man who produces tomatoes in Ireland for sale to Irish supermarkets needs to know first and foremost how to produce tomatoes, secondly general marketing and sales techniques that'd be equally as applicable in Germany, and only thirdly does he need any Irish knowledge, and the third is easier to acquire than the first two.

I am saying (a) non-locally-grounded bodies of knowledge are better and more valuable, therefore (b) locally-grounded mindsets are relatively impoverished, and (c) this is true in an objective, non-subjective, sense. I'll repeat myself with equivalent vocabulary: (a) locale-independent cultural content is better and more valuable, which implies (b) communities whose primary cognitive framework is predominantly nationalist and localist are culturally relatively impoverished, and (c) the poverty of the nationalist/localist mindset is not merely my subjective value-judgement -- it necessarily follows for anyone who accepts that horse knowledge is superior to Irish horse knowledge.

The nationalist/localist mindset can be found to one degree or another in every country. It tends to be more prevalent where education levels are lower. A country's mass media serve as a window into what's inside the heads of the masses on the matter. When you look at what the Irish mass media are producing, it is clear that the nationalist/localist mindset is deeply ingrained in the Irish and the conclusion is inescapable that the Irish masses are culturally impoverished.

By the way, knowledge independent of nation is not to be confused with knowledge of a foreign nation. To some extent the nationalist mindset can encourage an interest in foreign nations, because it doesn't involve dropping the nationalist framework entirely, and it can give more definition to one's own nation.

potlatch

The media agenda is very narrow. They'll try to find a national/local angle to appeal to readers. This is due to, firstly, readers being primarily interested in what they see as relevant to them and, secondly, they think it's relevant to them because the newspapers say so. It's a two-way street.

Ireland is not unique in this respect. Take any newspaper or media outlet and you'll find the same thing.

Whether it's symptomatic of insular nationalism? Potentially, as we haven't thrown off the yoke of the ideology nation-state, which is being eroded by globalisation. Ironically, then, globalist (or cosmopolitan) perspectives do not dominate news agenda, but they do dominate managers and CEOs of private companies, corporations and finance traders. Tragically, a global perspective also dominates the thoughts of many people living in developing countries who see the impacts on their doorsteps of decisions made by people thousands of miles away.

I agree, the 'nationalist mindset' is poisonous. As it emerged as a tacitical strategy to reduce war in Europe, it developed in the industrial era into a method to secure political allegiance to powerful classes, it did and continues to divert attention away from the systemic problems of the world, which require us as humans to take in a much deeper (but not necessarily broader) understanding of our world and human interconnections.

Soldie

potlatch wrote: »

The media agenda is very narrow. They'll try to find a national/local angle to appeal to readers. This is due to, firstly, readers being primarily interested in what they see as relevant to them and, secondly, they think it's relevant to them because the newspapers say so. It's a two-way street.

That Irish themed stories are popular in the media is more of a symptom of public opinion than something that can be brushed away as though it's merely a superfluous fact - it's what many Irish people want to see or hear. One only needs to look at the politics forum here to see that, for a large number of posters, debates over nationalism are the only political topic they have any interest in. Irish unification is not even on my priority list - I'm much more concerned about the obscenely irresponsible NAMA bill, as it will put every Irish citizen deeply in debt. The opposite is true for many though; they'll hotly debate Northern Ireland, whether Home Rule would have happened, whether the 6 counties are occupied, the IRA, the PIRA, the CIRA, the RIRA, Diet IRA, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the American invasion of Iraq, the Irish language, etc., but they'll avoid discussing far more pressing issues. I think it undermines the entire Irish political discourse, but it doesn't seem to be showing any signs of going away.

MacAvoydgeen

Theology is an impoverished body of knowledge compared to science (even theologians agree). But theology and science are two separate mindsets that can live inside one person's head more-or-less independently of each other. Because of their independence and separateness, the theology mindset has very little power to impoverish the science mindset owned by the same person. I said earlier: "Locally-grounded prior knowledge and interests forms the basis for the acquisition of more locally-grounded knowledge. And it inhibits the acquisition of non-locally-grounded knowledge." I thought earlier that this was obviously right, but now I think it's got a mistake. Everybody has multiple cognitive frameworks, or mindsets, with each one applicable to a different area in life. The scope and power of the inhibitory effect of one mindset on another mindset -- inside the same person -- is greatly weakened by the fact that the various mindsets are largely independent of one another. Hence, nationalist/localist values don't have a lot of power to inhibit, say, scientific values, because these two sets of values can co-exist fairly quietly and uncompetitively in the same person. Earlier I also said "people whose primary cognitive framework is predominantly nationalist and localist are culturally relatively impoverished". But now on second thoughts I don't think there's such a thing as a "primary cognitive framework". I still argue that the nationalist/localist mindset is culturally impoverished, but the argument is weaker when it's conceded that inside anyone's head the nationalist/localist mindset has got limited scope and can't do a lot of damage beyond that scope.

potlatch

Well, to put it another way, I believe firmly that people are fundamentally 'de-centred' and entertain multiple and contradictory models and concepts of just about everything. It's simply a matter of degree.

The myth of nationalism, and liberal individualism, which have historically gone together in profoundly contradictory ways, is the singular self and the singular collective entity as something essential, immutable and ahistorical.

But the fact that people are more interested in local issues than global, or even abstract ideas of philosophy, theology, ethics, well, it's just too difficult and too remote. It's not of immediate impact on people's lives, or not seen to be. This is completely understandable.

dkin

MacAvoydgeen, nothing stirs the soul like a bit of logic, ie a leads to b leads to c, I liked your OP.

First of all people are tribal they like associating themselves within certain tribes, this is a universal trait of humanity. The next thing required is an opponent, what is a tribe without an enemy tribe. Therefore as many Irish people associate themselves with the 'Irish tribe', they are fundamentally interested in it's interests and are willing to declare themselves loyal soldiers of this tribe and fight it's imagined battles. If they think the Irish tribe hates the Brits they will stand behind this idea, same with europe etc.

Have you ever seen university students wearing society hoodies, men wearing football jerseys, Ireland tops, religous symbols, cults etc. The world is a lonely place and people like to band together. For instance you yourself consider yourself a member of an enlightened elite and no doubt are hoping to find fellow members with similar interests to support you.

Unfortunately people for the most part are mindless sheep, willing to follow the path they have been told is right. I personally agree that the Irish mindset is hopeless nationalistic and of course it is impoverished for this, for the reasons you listed. Like the peasant who is unwilling to accept foreign advice or help as this would be an affort to his personal and societal ego.

I suggest instead learning about this trait and seeing how you might benefit from it for it's unlikely you will ever change it.

"Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind." - Albert Einstein

drunken_munky52

potlatch wrote: »

Tragically, a global perspective also dominates the thoughts of many people living in developing countries who see the impacts on their doorsteps of decisions made by people thousands of miles away.

The fact that we had September the 11th ultimatly shapes our prespectives today. This constant bombardment of the words "Terror, terrorist, jihad, war on terror" and so forth, sub conciously makes us fearful, self obsessed and ignorant. The war on terror is nothing more than a mind control machine, designed to keep primarily the US and British publics in fear, thus creating enemies, thus creating profit for the armaments industry. Its a sick world we live in when you take the fact for example that 450,000 US citizens die every year from cornary diseases and the civilian terrorist related deaths are around 30 annually, yet Homeland security has a budget over 100 billion whearas 4 billion went it heart disease research.

The media play our minds, including RTE TV. Its time to stop watching TV news, especially Skynews, BBC and CNN. Im sure that the Irish people wouldn't cry for terrorist news stories if they just fecked off back where they belong to bowels of the news machine.

Joycey

drunken_munky52 wrote: »

The media play our minds, including RTE TV.

Red Turkeys Excercising? I find it ironic that you come on here defending Zeitgeist yet complain about the media brainwashing us :rolleyes:

drunken_munky52

Joycey wrote: »

Red Turkeys Excercising? I find it ironic that you come on here defending Zeitgeist yet complain about the media brainwashing us :rolleyes:

Not defending, advocating ,get your script right. Complain? Where?

Have you anything contructive to add to the discussion rather than starting your sentance with three words that make no sense whatsoever .

Joycey

drunken_munky52 wrote: »

Not defending, advocating ,get your script right.

Well if you advocate and someone disagrees then you end up defending...

Complain? Where?

Id consider this complaining about being brainwashed by the media

This constant bombardment of the words "Terror, terrorist, jihad, war on terror" and so forth, sub conciously makes us fearful, self obsessed and ignorant. The war on terror is nothing more than a mind control machine, designed to keep primarily the US and British publics in fear, thus creating enemies, thus creating profit for the armaments industry. Its a sick world we live in

Have you anything contructive to add to the discussion?

I enjoyed the OP's two posts, never really put much thought into the notion that Irish people/media might be more engaged with Irish activity overseas than any other country.

Its just when you come on and rightly point out (though in a sensationalised and over the top fashion) that the Western media causes individualisation and fear in society, and serves to further the imperialist ambitions of their respective governments, however unintentionally, something doesnt sit right. Advocating/defending Zeitgeist shows that you have been manipulated just as much as those who watch Sky News and believe that there is no alternative to massive pay cuts, job losses and privatisation just because some hack labelled as an "economic expert" says so. The same level of uncritical absorption in something that has been made visually stimulating and sensationalist has taken place in both instances. If you trully believe in the whole Zeitgeist thing, then you would be best served by looking up all the counterevidence you can possibly collect on the internet and attempting a systematic debunking of the film/theory/whatever other ideological apparatus the movement has, if it withstands this then go forth and advocate, if not, then adopt some other form of political movement thats actually worth devoting time to.

starting your sentance with three words that make no sense whatsoever .

Was trying to work out what the RTE could have stand for when you also mentioned TV.

drunken_munky52

The Irish mindset is in a tug of war with two main opposing forces, your Fianna Fail or your Fine Gael.

Then off out on a tangent, you could be Labour, other than that your voice does not really count.

If we stick with FF, we be screwed. If we go with FG, we be screwed. If we go with Labour, then we go to the wall altogether.

If ZM is neutral and aims to replace our current corrupt system with a even keel, then I am all brainswashed out of failed traditional politics then I guess! Your right on the mark.

Joycey

drunken_munky52 wrote: »

I am all brainswashed out

For your viewing pleasure http://conspiracyscience.com/articles/zeitgeist/

drunken_munky52

Joycey wrote: »

For your viewing pleasure

Heres the favour in return:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7065205277695921912#

Watch the Zietgeist 2. If you find any information that "debunks" this movie, please feed it on to me.

BTW, agreed, Zietgeist 1 is not great. Even the creator admitted he made some research flaws for the first one, and re-cited it.

asdasd

This thread has gone way off topic. To answer the OP.

1) That happens in every country. If a German is killed in Ireland it will be big news in Germany, and Ireland.
2) Irish people probably know more abou the world - certainly the anglosphere - than the Anglosphere knows about us. To test this simply ( and there are countless examples) ask a group of Irish people to name the British Prime Minister, and then try the reverse ( the irish Teashop) in Britain. Similarly try that with the American President in Ireland, and the Irish president in America.

Thus we can rule out that Irish people are more narrowly focussed than the UK, or the US.

When you look at what the Irish mass media are producing, it is clear that the nationalist/localist mindset is deeply ingrained in the Irish and the conclusion is inescapable that the Irish masses are culturally impoverished.

Clearly you have never read an american newspaper, none of which ( bar the New York Times) cover anything but the US and Israel unless the US invades somewhere. The rest of the world does not exist.

The funny thing is this: the idea that Irisih people are more nationalist than others can only be belived by people with little knowledge of other societies and how they function, it is itself a form of localised knowledge, which could only be beieved by people with narrow experience or focus.

( I have lived in the US and the UK).

irishultra

yes thats because they are strong self reliant countries. ireland is a weak nation so why should they know about us

asdasd

yes thats because they are strong self reliant countries. ireland is a weak nation so why should they know about us

Hmm. Whatever. They probably dont know about us because we are small. I am answering the OP's criteria for nationalism; which he descripes as lack of knowledge of other societies; and by that criteria the US is more nationalist, and the UK less nationalist, and Ireland not at all comparatively.

Colonial powers will be more "strong" than the "weak" I suppose.

RomanticIreland

I'd liked how you outlined your point and agree

I do not believe Irish media cover international events to my liking there is too much of a focus on Ireland and everything Irish.

I read the guardian, Reuters, the new york times and bbc to keep abreast of events outside the country as they happen, irish newspapers/media are for local news and hold no real interest for me in regards to international events.

994

asdasd wrote: »

This thread has gone way off topic. To answer the OP.

1) That happens in every country. If a German is killed in Ireland it will be big news in Germany, and Ireland.
2) Irish people probably know more abou the world - certainly the anglosphere - than the Anglosphere knows about us.

And this is one of the biggest problems - the narrow focus on the Anglosphere. Even the debate on college fees only looks at the UK, Australia, USA, Canada, as if the rest of the world were irrelevant. Similarly, the tiniest American event gets 5 mins on the 6.1 news, while important stuff in Europe and elsewhere is ignored.